funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| Technical Harassment
InformationWeek did a similar story: »www.informationweek.com/story/sh···06902952
Either I'm grossly missing the point that they're trying to convey, or this is just bull-pucky. Someone, please explain.
Meanwhile, the only thing that I see as broken is their billing model. Charging "by the minute" made sense in an analog world. It is a model proven broken in the digital world -- voice-calls included.
My reply:
funchords
commented on Mar 11, 2008 5:04:32 PM
---QUOTE---In the wired world, Schabel points out, "a bit is a bit," but on wireless networks different kinds of data have far different impacts on the management and the performance of the overall system.
For example, a high-bandwidth peer-to-peer file-sharing application transferring 1 megabyte of data would take up 30 seconds of radio-frequency airtime, Schabel said. But 1 MB of data from a mobile e-mail device, which must continually check in with the server for new e-mails, could consume two hours of airtime. ---ENDQUOTE---
I've been using POP3 and IMAP over EDVO and 1xRTT for several years. The example quoted fails to illuminate the claim they are making.
Wired or wireless, the e-mail technology is no different and P2P is no different. Air-time has nothing to do with it, as the far end is not like a bank of PSTN modems that remains equally occupied and unavailable regardless of the traffic generated by the user.
If this explanation stands as the position of the wireless providers, then it appears to me to be a case of "technical harassment." They're trying to fool a gullible regulatory environment that a technology that stands to allow ISPs to pick-and-choose its traffic is sorely needed. Don't even try that -- it won't fly.
I read this article hoping to find out why wireless carriers might legitimately need DPI -- instead, I get that? I'm offended.
Are today's wireless networks truly allergic to some protocols currently in use? If so, explain that! Are whether today's wireless networks are capable of keeping up with current demand? If not, do we need to exempt carriers from any Network Neutrality expectation for a 1-2 year catch-up program? How will the wireless carrier ensure that its own "V-Cast"-style offerings are not given preference over the offerings of competitors?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
"We don't throttle any traffic," -Charlie Douglas, Comcast spokesman, on this report. |
